Just days before inmate Freddie Owens is set to die by lethal injection in South Carolina, the friend whose testimony helped send Owens to prison is saying he lied to save himself from the death chamber.

Owens is set to die at 6 p.m. Friday at a Columbia prison for the killing of a Greenville convenience store clerk in 1997.

But Owens’ lawyers on Wednesday filed a sworn statement from his co-defendant Steven Golden late Wednesday to try to stop South Carolina from carrying out its first execution in more than a decade.

Prosecutors reiterated that several other witnesses testified that Owens told them he pulled the trigger. And the state Supreme Court refused to stop Owens’ execution last week after Golden, in a sworn statement, said that he had a secret deal with prosecutors that he never told the jury about.

  • Maeve@kbin.earth
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    23 hours ago

    That the United States holds ourselves a bastion of democracy and human rights is absolutely absurd. The death penalty shouldn’t exist; This is quite possibly murder.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      8 hours ago

      I understand you’re speaking casually, but in fact many of us do not say that. It’s always a risky proposition when you conflate an organization with individuals in it.

      • Cosmonauticus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        Yeah but it’s many who do agree with it. In this case there’s enough elected officials who’s constituents want the death penalty to be a thing. Ours isn’t a perfect democracy but to argue our government isn’t a representation of its citizens is just a lie

    • joe_archer@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Killing somebody because they killed somebody just seems hypocritical. Regardless of the ethics.

      • Soggy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 hours ago

        From a strict utilitarian “this person is an active threat to the lives of others and cannot be rehabilitated” perspective, I get it. We kill wild animals for a lot less. Given perfect knowledge I don’t have a hard line against execution.

        But that’s a hell of a hypothetical. Lots of violence is circumstantial and not necessarily and indication of future behavior, especially if we actually gave a shit about mental health and improving the living conditions of struggling people. Far too many convictions are improper or outright incorrect. Society should have a responsibility to care for the worst of itself. It all stacks up to “do we trust ourselves, and our government, with something so extreme and irreversible?”

        • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 hours ago

          Well it always costs more, in the US Justice system, to execute someone than to keep them in prison for life. So that alone throws out the utilitarian approach. We’re all paying extra just to kill him now than if we just kept him locked up for life because he might be a direct threat to everyone and not be rehabilitated.

          • Soggy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 hours ago

            It’s not that cut-and-dry. Yes the monetary cost is higher, mostly due to appeals and such and I’m not suggesting we do things to make the conviction and sentence less certain. But there’s an argument to be made that a lifetime of solitary imprisonment, necessary for this hypothetical criminal, is more cruel than death.

            • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              2 hours ago

              I’m not sure there are people so unrecoverable that they need a lifetime in solitary. I’m fact I’m not sure how you pass the cruel and unusual criteria with that. Even in super max prisons for people who WANT to go out and kill strangers for example, they are able to regularly socialize and exercise and have mental stimulation. So no I don’t think there are a lot of people where spending extra money to kill them would be “more humane”. Seems more like a straw man/hypothetical than a practical reality.

    • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      I don’t have a problem with the death penalty as a concept.

      I have a problem with the fact that it disproportionately is given to people of color where evidence is dubious and circumstantial.

      Treason and sedition should still be capital crimes.

      • drdalek@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        22 hours ago

        I do, when you start putting the right to kill for crimes, in the hands of the state, you’ve lost the plot in democracy.

        • Fedizen@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          20 hours ago

          well we also made a ton of dubious self defense loopholes, so the state doesn’t have a monopoly